







> ? t£* * fC^TjfesS^^v 0 <L *<* s ^ r^A ^ 'Ji 

* 0 ^ *%ilwcs> *» n v o * ^yy/pjt ± H) ^ *“ 

3 4 0 ; *> <L^ C 0 * * (V . >* 

\ V *X> * I • A rJ^^OflO 0 ^ <£a * * / *» * A <£► 

a % ^ A . v /3iX'* >#> ,v *VWa l , « A. ,A ' j-f<fs ^' 

W .AW//A. 

“ » - * ' '■ - 2 


<* 


l l l l lf 


C3 






ft ft 


^ 4 I 

o V 


a 


o 


* • 


° ^5 ^ 

v v > <t 

<i r O * 

■>■•' y __ °^ * 




* cA 

* v/ ^> « 

* ,a ^ % 

„ %,'••' 

r° *?JL'’ » c> 

. o V 

* \0 v*. * 

* r\ * 

0 ^ o N 0 j ^ 

. *. ^ v v ^y. v * * 


* / i 




b> *'o. i 5V ,6* 

^ *Kp <? C ->’■ 

A °- 

* <L^ O 

o wV O 


V 'c\ .v 0 r V - f *° 


O V A 

kP b 


-V 


o 


A^*A* ° 

■* V O 

» * I 


o * s 


* «? °k • 

,or e °" ** * ^b . ^' - 


V A 


" *>0 V^ 


<0 r/\ 

y ? 

^ rv ^ 

°4. *•<’•• *°’ %** 

c- ,0 »*toL'» ^ 

T>v Xy ^ ^ 

: % ^ » 

* ^ v % Ilf* J* V 

^ '•**’ ^ <> 'o-»* <0^ f, c> 

^ t • ^ r o v c°; c ^ ^O ^ 

^ % a >5 * 

V* 0 T 


^0^ 


“ c,S ^ n 

■* «? ' J ^> 

,0^ ^o " 

.0^ G 0 "/* *^o 

v 


» * 


0 w 0 " *$ °*u * • ' 1 ° 

V ^ 

^ ^ ’-M/%° y <$' 






® * 


' Ai * 

/ A ^ ^ -. 


■ ° A 

* *^y a v 


a 


\ 


'o . A * ,G 


o V 




a , -\ 


V ^ Y •o, o 


.f l 


•#>. 


S)' S 5 .^'* ' Y> 




V f y * °- 


o ^ 7 /,» A - 


A 


\ 


* A ^ n '-* 

« ^. v - 


0 v C 0 N 0 ♦ 


^ V 


'4* &} 

O 

^ <N ^ i 

-O V^ .'ig 

° o> °^, - ‘ iP vv • j? 

.' A o 'Zm*? o b -? 
^ -...• y ^ *..-•’ ^o ; V'. 

.*" ''... , v ,'i*^°'. ^ aP vLVL'* > 


^r\ 


^ . . <; s 4 ^\ ^ ^ 


« « 


<b 'o . A * G V \D ♦ ' 

*, *P c, c 




A 




A 


o V . 

>y° ^ « 

j£* * 




A 


o 


• ^ 

* <x> o 

® N o 0 IV °^ * • » 1 


« V* QV 


V 




^ A ” 

A A ,J 


V t * O 




,• A °^ ^ 
—•*,/ b. * 


* .£ °?n 


*o % A 

t As s 




A vT. 

































V * * 




s- 





A 

<?.* r<» 

^ ‘‘ 

*" 1 ■ f 

,., ,. «*> X? 0' s -—'♦ '> 





• *« °«. 

o- X> °o *. . 



v ^ * 7 0#* ■" 


r c 

O' S 


- 

i#.*^ ^ <u ' 

C> A> .<-'«* 


’ O V % 

x° v\ 

^ <4* * 

rv j> 

«.° 

•> **v^ 

**/QEV. ^ 





V^ o >• ' » + ^>. 

A *L/y?^ * «£ 

N * &fV/7?^' ~r 



*+$ 


0^ o'’"'" ^o 

C * o 

s cVX\\\T\Mk- * 


b V 

v> **tzym*' ^ ^ - 

/ %^v v^v v' 

v * ,eo ' ^ a0 v > \> V , s 

A^ .<C\ A t> . ^ 5* * *P * a^ i _j 







^ & 




* cV ^r. 

•* W* <J b- * 

« > «- v ct- -* , 

” A° A .. 

O’ C “" ' - "*b A* •>■'•, <b 

0 >'<^§^C* ° W* *‘-^ * * 

^ WWMI ^ ^ \ 


<r. 





'O . A * .0 


. (A 

v ♦ 

*b& 

f * 

*> 



’ ^ « 
^*0* 


0 / n 




■*> V V * v * r O A <0' c, 5 *’'* ^ \, r « * • O 


° -^ n * 

: ,j v v 

° A^*V ° 

* 4- v <i> - 


^0^ 


r 0^ o°* c * 

C » _ o 



«A ^ V ^ 


,0^ c 

0 ,%5 

0 ^5 b<v ^ ,y ,"' 

vP -^uwwv ^ \ ' <*• ‘b- 

r^ »> * <1 t O * 

"■ <>. ► A . •_ ^ 

« ^ A V ♦ - 

; 4>*\ : - 

* 0^ b ■* 






* ^ 


> 





0 0 w ° ♦ ^O 


i ^ y o 

\0 *7*. * 

P- <£*. ^ 

^ / n 0 % *+ 
'i\ 0 ' b, J.V 4 '"% > 

♦ rvf\ /In <> ^ • 





oV 




,f' 



° ^fN C,' 





• • 


c^ ^rv 

♦ </ ^ 

•-?.?•* G* * * 

<?•"" 

bV *^o* ! 

0- ^ '* „'To ^ ^ .0-5 


<A 



A. 

Jy° ^ 

A v «■ s * -*y -v V> 

.. jp sAffar. * 

, ^vP s> s « 

° aV*^. ° 

^ ^ ^ ^ °. ^ ^ - ■» ■A. 

'•• s ' A <+**•** Jy 

^ 4 M ♦ J&m/7?2* * T 




C 




C ^ e 

ks 4 ^ < 

•*• 0 s ° % 

.’ / O b 4 
*»»» .V °^ * 

v v f y * °* c\ 

'. •)>, A /.«-8-*- •^ , - 




V'V 













































































CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES 


;13 


CIVIL GOVERNMENT. 


A. LECTURE, 


by 

EEY. JAMES KEOGH, D.D., 

OF PITTSBURG, PA. 




CINCINNATI: 

CATHOLIC TELEGRAPH PRINT, 
18 62 . 

















✓ 


























































































LECTURE. 


dfatlurlfc Iprinqi^ltis a} fit’ll (Do comment. 


Ladies and Gentlemen:— 

I intend to address you on Catholic Principles of Civil Gov¬ 
ernment. The whole civilized world has been, and is in a state 
of revolution. Our own country has not escaped. What, two 
years ago, we would have deemed impossible, is now almost the 
only subject which engages our attention. Rebellion and civil 
war were words which we fondly hoped would be known amongst 
us only to express a state of society from which we should ever 
be free. But w T e, too, have been put on our trial. It becomes, 
then, the duty of every one carefully to reflect on the principles 
that ought to guide his action in the emergencies which have 
arisen, or may arise. I therefore invite your serious attention 
to the truths I shall proceed to lay before you. I do not pro¬ 
pose to engage in subtile disquisitions, or to enter into long 
arguments on matters merely of opinion. I intend to confine 
myself to those principles which are taught by Catholic theolo¬ 
gians, and practically inculcated by the Church herself. 

We must start from the principle always laid down by the 
Church, that the power of ail civil governments comes from God. 
St. Paul teaches this great truth in a manner not to be mis¬ 
taken. He enjoins on the Romans (Rom. xiii: 1, 2,) to be sub¬ 
ject to the higher powers, for, he says, “ There is no power 
but from God : and the powers that be, are ordained of God.” 
Therefore, he infers, “ he that resisteth the power, resisteth the 
ordinance of God. And they that resist, purchase to them¬ 
selves damnation.” Here, then, we have one great principle : 
that civil power comes from God; that its just enactments bind 

( 3 ) 




4 


CATHOLIC PKINCIPLES OF 


in conscience, forasmuch as the transgression thereof is resist¬ 
ance to God, which purchaseth damnation. But, it may be 
asked, if this be true, how can we maintain the popular asser¬ 
tion, that governments derive their pow*er from the consent of 
the governed? We are taught, now-a-days, that the people are 
the source of all power; how, then, can it be said that there is 
no power but from God ? It is not so hard as it might appear, 
at first sight, to reconcile these two assertions. Catholic the¬ 
ologians commonly teach that the governing power is not com¬ 
municated directly to the person or persons who wield it, but 
that God gives it directly to the people, or the whole com¬ 
munity, and that they transmit it to the ruler of their choice. 
For, in every community, it is necessary that there be a power 
to govern, a principle of unity to bind the different ele¬ 
ments together; otherwise, instead of a well-organized state, we 
would have a disorderly mob. We can not imagine a well-dis¬ 
ciplined army without a commander, nor a well-regulated com¬ 
munity without a governor. Now, God desires that men should 
form into civil society, for this conduces to their temporal well¬ 
being. Commerce, the arts, education even, and science, could 
never have reached their present perfection, had men lived 
separated from one another, each family by itself, with no bond 
to unite them in a community, where their interests would be 
the same, and their energies and labors would be employed for 
their mutual good. And, as he who desires the end, must de¬ 
sire also the means necessary to attain that end, God, desiring 
that civil society exist, must desire also that there be a princi¬ 
ple of unity, without which, exist it can not. This principle of 
unity is, as I have said, the governing power. God ordinarily 
leaves the selection of the person or persons who are to exer¬ 
cise this power, to those who are to be governed. For Ilis 
own chosen people, for a time, He selected the rulers himself. 
But this was an exceptional case. The form of government, 
and the persons who are to wield the power, are left to be 
determined by the consent of the governed. Divine Brovidence 
may so shape events as to bring about or permit the elevation of 
a certain person or dynasty, but God never manifests His holy 
will in a more direct manner. The people, then, are not the 
original source of power. It comes $riginally from God. He, 


CIVIL GOVERNMENT. 


5 


allowing to the people the selection of their rulers, gives to 
them the power that is necessary for civil government; they 
choose the person, or persons, who are to be the depository of 
this power, and, by this very act, they hand it over to them. 

But they can not recall it at pleasure ; for everything done 
from on high, is done for good, not for evil—for improvement, 
not for destruction. Now, to leave to the governed the power 
to overthrow a government at will, would be to throw open the 
door to confusion and anarchy. Than this, nothing could be 
more contrary to the designs of God in establishing civil society. 
He meant that this society should bring happiness and pros¬ 
perity to the human race, and this end it can never attain, 
unless it be regulated by a fixed, permanent government. Some 
forms allow, of course, of more changes in regard to persons 
than others. The monarchical is the least mutable, as the death, 
or the resignation, or the deposition of the reigning monarch is 
the only cause for a change. The democratic form is the most 
subject to changes, for its very essence requires that most of 
the officers of government retain power only for a time, and 
then surrender it to those whom the voice of the people may 
have called to succeed them. But, even in this case, all has to 
be done according to legally established form. Take the example 
of the Constitution under which we live. Although not purely 
democratic, it exemplifies what I wish to say. The president 
duly elected must be obeyed by all, whether, before election, 
they were his opponents or friends; during his term of office he 
can exercise his constitutional powers, no matter how unpopular 
his administration may be. If he violate the laws, he can be 
impeached and tried, but only by the proper tribunal, and after 
certain forms. So, in the legislative branch, an act passed by 
both Houses of Congress, and approved by the president, if not 
unconstitutional, forms part of the law of the land, even though, 
were it to be submitted to the popular vote, a majority of the 
people might be found against it. The Constitution itself pre¬ 
scribes the manner which is to be followed, in order to change 
its provisions, and changes introduced in any other manner 
would be null and void. Thus, you see, that even in the freest 
form of government, there is no such a thing as the possibility 
of a legal change of existing laws, or even of removing legally 


6 


CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES OP 


appointed officers, by the mere manifestation of the popular will. 
All government, it is very true, rests originally on the consent 
of the governed; this consent, as it was freely given, could have 
been freely withheld; but, once given, it can not be withdrawn 
without most serious cause, and, if withdrawn without such cause, 
its effects yet remain, and the government founded on it is as 
legitimate as it was on the day on which it was formed. All this 
is equally true of other forms of government which, necessarily, 
allow of less change. To sum up, then, God, approving of civil 
society, delegates to the original founders thereof the power 
necessary to organize and to govern it; they choose the form of 
government, and the persons to whom they intrust the governing 
power; at that moment commences the distinction between the 
governing and the governed, a distinction which can not be 
•changed, modified, or abolished, at the mere fiat of the popular 
will. I may add, that it has often been the case, that the civil 
power has been usurped by some person without the consent of 
the people. But, if he remain in peaceful possession of power, 
and the people gradually acquiesce in obedience to his rule, it is 
manifest that they thus consent to the form of government which 
has been imposed on them. If this state of things last for a 
sufficient length of time to give them a fair opportunity of pro¬ 
testing against the usurpation, and they fail to do so, and if the 
rights of no third party be infringed on, their implied consent 
supplies the original defect in the title of the usurper; he becomes 
a legitimate ruler; and his government shares all the prerogatives 
of legitimate power. 

The consideration of these principles now leads us to the most 
intricate and difficult point of our subject—the mutual rights and 
duties of the ruler and the governed. To make matters clearer, 
I will speak of. the governing power as a person, because all 
branches of government form one body, in which is vested the 
civil authority. The doctrine that a government can not be 
overthrown without cause, must not be confounded with the theory 
that kings rule by right Divine, that is, that they, personally, are 
appointed by God, and that no matter how bad or tyrannical they 
may be, they can never forfeit their power. This is not Catholic, 
but is essentially Protestant doctrine. It. was first broached by 
imperial lawyers in the middle ages, during the great contest 


CIVIL GOVERNMENT. 


7 


between the Pontiffs and the German Emperors, in order to pre¬ 
vent the former from interfering to protect the liberties of the 
Church, and of the people, against the latter. But it came more 
into vogue after the great religious secession of the sixteenth 
century, when the great principles of freedom, which the Church 
had held out as a beacon light to civilization and humanity, dur¬ 
ing the dark and tempestuous middle ages, were utterly ignored. 
James I., of England, wrote a book in defense of this pretended 
right Divine. He carried his theories into practice. He sent 
■word to his Parliament “that God had appointed him absolute 
master; and that all privileges which legislative bodies enjoyed, 
■were pure concessions proceeding from the bounty of kings.” 
His doctrine was carried into practice even further by his son 
Charles, who by it was led to a course of oppression and disre¬ 
gard for the popular will that eventually cost him his life. The 
same theory was formerly maintained by Puffendorf and other 
Lutheran writers. King James was met and confuted by two 
eminent Jesuit theologians, Bellannine, im. Italy, and Suarez, in 
Spain. It is worthy of remark that Suarez, the Jesuit, writing 
on civil power, uses language which finds its counterpart in the 
preamble to the Declaration of Independence. And, it is to be 
remembered, that there is no modern theologian of more weight 
than this illustrious man, none whose opinions are entitled to 
more credit. He does nothing more than to develop the great 
principles laid down in the thirteenth century, by the founder of 
modern theology, the Angel of the Schools, St. Thomas of Aquim 
I will proceed to state those principles, never advancing any 
proposition not maintained by these great theologians, or, at 
least, not a legitimate consequence of what they have taught. 

The civil ruler receives his power, not to further his own private 
good, but to protect and promote the interests of the community. 
Hence his acts must be all directed to this end. He has the law 
making power; indeed, in this, and in the execution of the laws, 
his authority chiefly consists. Now, what is a law? St. Thomas 
defines it to be “ an ordinance of reason for the common good, 
promulgated by him who has the government of the community.” 
In the first place, a law must be according to right reason, and, 
if it be not, St. Thomas says that it is not a law, but rather a 
perversion of law. And, following S. Isidore of Seville, he 


8 


CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES OP 


teaches that to be according to reason, it must be for the public 
good; in other Words, it must be, he says, just, its observance 
must be possible, it must be according to nature, or to the customs 
of the country, in accordance with the circumstances of time and 
place, necessary, or at least useful, not intended for the benefit 
of private individuals, but for the common good of all citizens. 
These are the conditions of a good law, laid down by a monk of 
the thirteenth century. And summing up, he further adds, that a 
human law, to be according to reason, must be not opposed to the 
Divine Law, or to the law of nature, or to the well-being of those 
for whom it is framed. And these conditions he requires, that a 
law oblige in conscience, so that, enumerating the different forms 
of government, the monarchical, the democratic, the oligarchical, 
and others, he concludes by mentioning the tyrannical, which, he 
says, is entirely corrupt, whence from it we can get no examples 
of laws. Thus does Catholic theology set bounds to the preten¬ 
sions of the civil power; it sternly points out to it the qualities 
which its laws must have to be just, and binding in conscience, 
and it declares that if they have them not, they are null and void. 
In this doctrine, the tyrant who acts for his own private interest, 
and forgets the good of the people, finds his rebuke. The saying 
of Louis XIV., the grand monarch of France, that he w'as the 
State, is confuted; it is declared that the people have a right to 
be benefited by the laws; that these must be in accordance with 
their customs and habits. When reading over these teachings 
of the great theologian, the mind is naturally carried to the 
Declaration of 1776. Take those laws of England which that 
document denounces as unjust, examine them by these principles 
of St. Thomas of Aquin, and you will find that his teaching sus¬ 
tains the doctrines of the patriots of the Revolution. And yet 
the Church is pointed at with scorn and derision as the upholder 
of tyranny, the protector of the oppressors of the people ! Such 
is ever the fate of justice and truth. They are persecuted, mis¬ 
represented, belied; the world loves falsehood, and there are 
always men base enough to gratify its desires. 

We are naturally led, in this connection, to inquire into a prin¬ 
ciple which has been asserted, of late years, in a very prominent 
manner, and which has exercised not a little influence in bringing 
about the troubles which now afflict our country. This principle 


CIVIL GOVERNMENT. 


9 


teaches that there is a law higher than the civil law, which over¬ 
rules this latter, in case of any conflict between them. We have 
just learned from St. Thomas, that a civil law, to be just, must 
be in accordance with the positive law of God, and the law of 
nature, as w r ell as conducive to the welfare of those for whom it is 
framed. If, therefore, it be not in accordance with the law of 
God, or the law of nature, it is not binding in conscience. I pre¬ 
sume that it is not necessary to say here that, by law of nature, 
is not meant the physical condition of soil, climate, or race, but that 
great moral law, written by nature in the heart of every man, and 
confirmed and enforced by God in the Ten Commandments. This 
law, and other laws promulgated by God, are, of course, of a 
higher order than the enactments of the civil power, because they 
come from a higher authority. The command of the inferior 
must, necessarily, yield to that of the superior, and king or 
emperor has no power against the law of God. The principle, 
then, is undeniably true; it is the principle on which the martyrs 
went to the stake and the scaffold, the principle which Peter pro¬ 
claimed when he said to the council, “ We ought to obey God rather 
than man.” But it is in the application that lies the danger. A 
fanatic may be conscientiously Convinced that he has a right to 
remove the evil caused by a public malefactor, by depriving him 
of life, and, misapplying the principle of the higher law, commit 
the crime of murder. It is not very difficult to misunderstand 
passages of Scripture, and to subvert society, acting on such mis¬ 
taken convictions. How can this danger be avoided? What rule 
can be laid down, by which this principle of the higher law can 
be safely applied in practical cases ? I know of one alone, but 
it will be satisfactory only to Catholics. It is this: There is only 
one power on earth that has the right to decide whether the eivil 
law be in accordance with, or in opposition to, the law of God. 
That power is the Church of Christ. To her, the Divine Founder 
has left the decision of all moral questions, promising to afford her 
unerring assistance in the rendering thereof. She is a living 
body, constantly speaking, advising, exhorting, rebuking. She 
has not only the power to point out when and where the civil 
law is contrary to the law of God, but it is her duty to do so. 
This duty she has never failed to discharge, and, hence, she has 
always encountered the mortal hatred of tyrants. As long, there- 
2 


10 


CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES OP 


fore, as the Church, through her ministers, does not condemn a 
law, her children can remain tranquil, certain that they are not 
doing wrong in obeying it. For example, she has condemned, 
as unjust and unlawful, the African slave trade. In it, therefore, 
no Catholic can conscientiously take part. As yet, she has pro¬ 
nounced no judgment of Negro Slavery; and Catholics can hold, 
on that vexed subject, whatever opinion they think most in 
accordance with right reason. Nor do we thus claim for the 
Church the right to interfere in politics; hut we merely restrict 
to a divinely-appointed, infallible tribunal a right, the usurpation 
and reckless exercise of which, by irresponsible, self-constituted 
teachers, have been productive of incalculable evil, have, in fact, 
contributed to bring the most prosperous and happy country in 
the world to the verge of utter ruin. Here is the secret why 
Catholics are conservative; why, whatever may be our private 
opinions on the questions of the day, we do not fall into the 
exaggerated fanaticism now so rampant. The principle of private 
judgment must produce disruption in civil as well as in religious 
society. Moral questions must be considered, civil laws must 
touch on them in one way or another; and, if you leave it to the 
private judgment of every one to determine the relative bearings 
of the moral and the civil laws, you render government impossible, 
unless by brute force. No majority, no reason of state, no pol¬ 
itical expediency or necessity, are of a moment’s account, when 
weighed against the obligation of the moral law; and, if every one 
have the right to determine what this moral law is, I see no escape 
from anarchy but in standing armies and absolute despotism. 
The fire may appear but a spark; you may smother it, but you 
can not put it out. Slowly and stealthily it will consume, one 
by one, all the supports of government and order, until, at last, 
the whole edifice will fall with a crash, that will astonish and 
terrify the world. Wherever so-called Catholic governments have 
endeavored to muzzle the Church, because she opposed their 
iniquitous laws, they have compassed their own ruin. France, 
Spain, Austria, Naples, all bear witness to this truth. It is im¬ 
possible to avoid the danger of conflicts between the civil law and 
mistaken notions of moral obligation, unless men listen to the 
authoritative, infallible voi-ee of the only true Church of Christ. 

We have seen the duty of the ruler toward the people. He is 


CIVIL GOVERNMENT. 


11 


to wield his power for their good. Men entered into civil society 
yielding some of their natural rights, that, in union, they might 
find security, strength, prosperity, happiness. To the attainment 
of these ends all laws must he directed; this is the imperative 
duty of the governing power. But what are the duties of the 
governed ? To obey the just laws and enactments of the civil 
authority. This is the great lesson which catholicity never ceases 
to inculcate. “ Let every soul be subject to the higher powers ,” 
cries St. Paul. He teaches us that the civil ruler is God’s min¬ 
ister to us, and he commands us to obey him for conscience’ sake. 
All just laws must be obeyed; no private interest, no surging of 
popular discontent, no specious theories can absolve the Christian 
from this obligation. While the Church tells the civil ruler that, 
in exercising his power, he must look only to the public good, 
she teaches the people that they must obey the laws, and that, if 
they prove refractory, the civil authority can use the sword, which 
has been placed in its hands to punish offenders, to maintain the 
inviolable majesty of the law. The freer the government, the 
less physical force is placed at its disposal, the more necessary is 
it for the public good, that this principle be inculcated, and deeply 
impressed on the minds of all. For, if it be forgotten or denied, 
order must, necessarily, give way to confusion, government to 
anarchy. The Church, in the performance of her sublime mission, 
has always proclaimed this principle. She has calmed the pas¬ 
sions of infuriated men, who rose up in lawless rebellion against 
their rulers ; she has silenced the low mutterings of ill-suppressed 
discontent, in those who imagined themselves oppressed and 
down-trodden; her voice condemns those secret conventicles, 
where, under the cover of darkness, are hatched plots for the 
subversion of authority; in a word, she is always to be found on 
the side of law and order, bringing ail her influence to their sup¬ 
port, when they are threatened. For this she is denounced as 
the friend of tyrants, the enemy of liberty. But, in truth, she is 
liberty’s best friend. For nothing is more essential to liberty 
than order, and the observance of the laws. Liberty does not 
involve leave for every one to do as he pleases; on the contrary 
it requires every one to obey all legal enactments. We under¬ 
stand these truths very well, when they come home to ourselves. 
We may applaud revolutions in Europe, and appeal to them as 


12 


CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES OF 


glorious examples of the progress of the age, that proclaims, every¬ 
where, the sovereignty of the people. But when, on the same 
principle, attempts are made to break up this government, we 
soon hear that the laws can not be violated with impunity, that 
rebellion must be put down, that no concession should be to armed 
traitors. These are true sentiments of loyalty, which alone can 
save a nation. But why should that be wrong in Europe, which 
is right in America? Why should a general, who puts down 
rebellion in Italy, be called a butcher, and he who suppresses it 
in America, be a patriot and a hero? Why was it wrong and 
cruel in the Pope to gather together an army of volunteers to keep 
down his mutinous subjects, if it be noble and patriotic, as it 
undoubtedly is, to volunteer to suppress an uprising which is 
supported by the greater portion of the Southern people? Were 
we to apply to our own country the principles so commonly used 
in judging on European revolutions, we should have allowed the 
rebellion to destroy that Union in which are the strength and 
power of the nation. The very papers that are loudest in favor 
of the most extreme measures against our rebels, are most clam¬ 
orous in defense of insurrection in Italy. Sometimes, on the 
same page, mayhap in the same column, you will find an article 
advocating the confiscation of all the property, and the hanging 
of all the traitors at the South, and another lauding Garibaldi to 
the skies. Nay, more, there was danger that the cause of the 
Union would be disgraced by the support of the arch rebel of 
Italy. So inconsistent is human nature, when, abandoning prin¬ 
ciples, it follows impulse or interest. The doctrines of the Church 
are clear and well-defined. All just laws of legitimate govern¬ 
ments must be obeyed; revolution, without cause, is rebellion. 
This is true conservatism, the only system that can uphold order, 
or promote the public good anywhere, most of all, in a free 
country. 

It remains for us to consider the case when the civil authority 
comes into collision with the people. This may happen either 
because subjects refuse to obey just laws, or because the govern¬ 
ment acts unjustly, tyrannically, in a manner and to an extent 
not to be borne with. I have already hinted what the civil ruler 
has a right to do in the first case. It is his duty to see that the 
laws are executed, and the sword—emblem of the punishing power, 


CIVIL GOVERNMENT. 


13 


has been placed in his hands for this purpose. He can use force 
to put down resistance, but never unless in the cases, and after the 
manner prescribed by law, or pointed out by necessity. In some 
forms of government, more latitude is left to the ruler, than in 
others; but it is an obvious principle, that force should never be 
resorted to, unless in the last extremity. Here we always find 
the Church counseling moderation; abhorring herself the shed¬ 
ding of blood, she endeavors to prevent it as far as she can. She 
thus tamed the fierce dispositions of the men of the middle ages, 
and taught them that, whenever they can be successfully used, 
moral suasion and conciliation are preferable to physical force. 
But there are occasions, alas ! where these are of no avail. Thus 
we have seen the Sovereign Pontiff obliged to use force to put 
down rebellion; indeed, this manner of keeping the peace is the 
only one that can be now adopted with effect, in many countries 
of Europe. At the present moment, we are similarly situated; 
all peaceful means having been exhausted, the strong arm of the 
nation has been put forth to crush rebellion. May God grant 
that victory may continue to perch on the nation’s banner, and 
that a speedy and lasting peace may bring renewed and increased 
prosperity to our reunited country! 

But the case that presents most difficulty is where the arbi¬ 
trary and tyrannical course of the civil pow'er becomes so in¬ 
tolerable that its acts, to use the expression of St. Thomas, are 
no longer laws, but the perversion of law. The American Declar¬ 
ation of Independence lays down the principle that established gov¬ 
ernments are not to be overthrown for light or transient causes, 
but that they can be resisted if they become subversive of the 
ends for which they were established, which are the lives, the 
liberty, and the happiness of the people. This is the correct 
doctrine, and it is, moreover, expressed in very similar terms by 
St. Thomas. He says, that unless the oppression be too great, it 
is better to bear with it than to run the risk of the many evils of 
civil war, which may be worse than those that arose from the op¬ 
pression itself. It is not lawful to proclaim a revolution for any 
light grievance; one or two bad laws will not justify the rush¬ 
ing into the danger of civil war. And, he remarks, that design¬ 
ing persons, under pretext of defending liberty, and expelling 
tyrants, get possession of power themselves, and become far more 


14 


CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES OE 


oppressive and tyrannical than the former rulers. He brings, as 
an example of this, an anecdote related by ancient historians of 
Dionysius of Syracuse, a tyrant whose name has been handed 
down to the execration of posterity. Whilst the citizens gen¬ 
erally were praying for the death of the tyrant, an old woman 
made it a point to pray publicly that his life might be prolonged. 
Dionysius asked her what motive impelled her to pray for him. 
She answered, “ When I was a young girl, we had a very tyranni¬ 
cal sovereign, and we all desired his speedy death. He was killed, 
and his successor turned out to be worse than he had been; I 
desired, all the more, the death of this second tyrant, and was glad 
when it took place; but in his stead we got you, who are worse 
than either of the other two; so I think it better to bear with you 
than to incur the terrible calamity of having a fourth worse 
than you.” It is the old fable of King Log and King Stork, and 
the moral is, that it is frequently better to bear with evils, 
than to seek violent measures of redress. St. Thomas, therefore, 
recommends Christian resignation under oppression, and con¬ 
demns the assassination of unjust rulers, and any private, unau¬ 
thorized uprising against the constituted authorities. He says, 
that whatever is done against a tyrant should be done by public 
authority; for, if the people had the right to appoint a ruler, they 
have a right also to deprive him of power, or to limit him in its 
exercise, if he make bad use of it. Nor is this breaking faith 
with the ruler; for he, by not acting faithfully in the use of his 
power, has deserved that the contract made with him by his sub¬ 
jects be no longer observed. But, he says, if there be no way of 
removing the tyrant, the people must fain recur to God, who is 
our helper in tribulations, and who holds in his hands the hearts 
of kings. He sometimes punishes the sins of people by allowing 
them to be ground down by a despotism against which they 
are powerless. Whilst then St. Thomas recommends Christian 
patience and forbearance, as well as human caution and prudence, 
he clearly teaches, that if all other means fail, the people have 
the right to take back either part or the whole of the power 
which they confided to the civil ruler, in case that it has been 
used tyrannically for their destruction. But he insists that this 
be done by the whole people, not by any one person, clique, or 
party, in their name. And here we may remark, how truly this 


CIVIL GOVERNMENT. 


15 


condition was observed in the American Revolution. It was di¬ 
rected, from the beginning, by a Congress of representatives of 
the people, seconded and aided by the local provincial assemblies. 
The Congress appointed all civil and military officers, directed all 
Operations of peace and war. Thus lawlessness was checked, 
order was preserved, the real will of the people was known and 
obeyed. Private ambition was made subservient to the public 
weal, the real interests of the country were furthered, and the 
world beheld a revolution conducted on principles of law and 
order. How different was this spectacle from the scenes of law¬ 
less violence, rapine, and murder, that have marked almost all 
the revolutions of the Old World, even that of England! Thus, 
by practical illustration, we can appreciate the high wisdom that 
dictated to the great Mediaeval theologian the idea, that the only 
legitimate revolution is one which rises against unbearable tyr¬ 
anny, is approved of by the whole people, and conducted by pub¬ 
lic authority. 

Suarez develops the same idea, following, as he always does, 
the lead of his great Master. • But he dwells upon one point 
which I will present to you, leaving its obvious application to 
your own consideration. He defines sedition to be a war between 
two sections of the same commonwealth or state, or between the 
ruler and his subjects. He says war between two parts, or sec¬ 
tions of the same state, the supreme authority being either de¬ 
stroyed or unable to interfere, is always unjust on the part of 
the aggressor, just on the part of the section that acts on the 
defensive. He assigns as the reason of this decision that there 
is no authority in one portion of a state which would enable it 
legitimately to wage war on another. In other words, the war 
making power is an attribute of sovereignty. But, he adds, the 
Supreme Governor can sometimes, if there be an urgent public 
necessity, confer on one section the power of making war on the 
other, but then it will not be a war between sections, but between 
the government and a refractory portion of the commonwealth. 
But what, he subjoins, if this refractory portion be really ag¬ 
grieved, and can not obtain redress of its wrongs from the gov¬ 
ernment? He answers, that it can not legally do more than 
private persons could. That is, if these wrongs amount to tyr¬ 
anny, revolution is lawful; otherwise, it is not. So far ouarez, 


16 


CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES OF 


whom I have translated almost literally. lie then goes on to con¬ 
sider the case of a whole people against the government, and 
solves it in the same manner as St. Thomas. Thus, you see, how 
Catholic theologians admit, and, at the same time, restrict the 
right of revolution. I am not now speaking of a change of gov¬ 
ernment in a peaceful and legal manner. Revolution involves an 
appeal to the last right that a people can exercise, that of resort¬ 
ing to arms to take back the power which they once confided to 
their rulers for their mutual good, for the benefit of all the mem¬ 
bers of society. It is allowable, when all legal means of redress 
have been exhausted, when oppression has reached such a point 
that the ends of civil government are no longer attained; and, 
even then, it must have the consent of the people, and be directed 
by public authority framed by them. 

We have thus traced the origin of civil government, its duties 
and its rights. The power which wields, comes from God, who 
ever trusts it to the hands of the people, when they are on the point 
of forcing themselves into civil society. They hand over this 
power to rulers chosen by themselves, or placed over them by 
accident or design. Having once delegated this power, they can 
not revoke it without serious cause. It is given to their rulers 
for the common good, and for this alone it can be used by them. 
Any other exercise of it is an abuse, a perversion. Laws framed 
in a spirit of justice, must be obeyed; and force can be lawfully 
employed by a government to insist on their execution. At the 
same time, when a government has become tyrannical, when it 
employs the power intrusted to it, not to protect, but to oppress 
the people, not to further the public good, but to subserve private 
interest—when, in a word, it becomes dangerous to the lives, or 
subversive of the liberties or happiness of its subjects, then, all 
peaceful redress through the ordinary legal means being impos¬ 
sible, rebellion against it is lawful, provided it be in the name of 
the whole people, a large majority of whom approve of the meas¬ 
ures taken against those in authority. These are Catholic princi¬ 
ples of civil government, as laid down by our greatest theolo¬ 
gians. 

It is true that reality falls far below the perfection of the ideal 
which they present. Human passions have always interfered, and 
always will interfere, to produce disorder, tyranny on the part of 


CIVIL GOVERNMENT. 


IT 


rulers, or lawlessness on the part of the people. It may he said 
that Catholic countries are no better governed than Protestant or 
infidel nations. This may be, perhaps, in some respects is, true. 
But when has the world listened with docility to the voice of 
reason and truth? God himself once chose a people, which He 
separated from all the nations of the earth. He appointed gov¬ 
ernors, enacted a code of laws for its guidance, and directed its 
every movement. Yet the history of that people is a contin¬ 
uous record of its rebellion against God. Hence he subjected 
it to temporal calamities, allowed its enemies to overrun its ter¬ 
ritory, and finally scattered it over the face of the earth. Yet, 
who is there so blasphemous as to say that the evils wffiich befel 
the Jewish nation w r ere the result of an unwise direction of 
Providence? So it is with the Church. Never treating of worldly 
things, unless when they enter the sphere of spiritual duties, she 
tells the nations and their rulers their mutual rights and duties. 
If they, blinded by passion, hearken not to her voice, the fault is 
assuredly not hers. Wisdom may go forth in the public way, and 
find none willing to listen to her voice. The folly is on the part 
of the unwilling, not on hers. So truth, justice, and morality are 
on the side of the Church; despotism, lawlessness, and disorder, 
if they exist, are not to be laid at her door. So-called Catholic 
governments have persecuted her; she never ceased, precisely, to 
teach the principles which I have developed. There is one sug¬ 
gestive fact, which is sufficient to show the real state of the ques¬ 
tion. Oppressive governments are opposed to the free exercise of 
ecclesiastical power; lawless revolutions invariably persecute the 
Church. The reason is, because both extremes find their con¬ 
demnation in the Catholic principles of government, in the beauti¬ 
ful ideal of a civil state, presented by the teaching of the Church. 
Do not, therefore, judge these principles by the evil effects of human 
passion, produced against their tendency and influence. Judge 
them rather in themselves. Opposed equally to tyranny and to 
lawlessness, to despotism and unjustifiable revolution, on them 
alone can any well organized society rest with security. They 
protect liberty, and, at the same time, vindicate the majesty of tfie 
law; they prevent anarchy, while they repel oppression; in a 
word, they present the ideal of a civil society, wherein the govern- 


18 


CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES OF 


ing and the governed live in mutual peace and harmony, each 
respecting the rights of the other, working for the common well- 
fare, knowing no interests but the good of country, no enemy 
but the country’s foe, a society founded on justice and right, 
living in peaceful obedience to law, guided and protected by 
Grod.° 

I have said nothing about the comparative merits of the differ¬ 
ent forms of civil government, because this is a practical question, 
to be decided not upon abstract principles alone, but upon various 
considerations of race, nation, time, power, and other similar cir¬ 
cumstances. A large nation may need a very different govern¬ 
ment from a small state; an impetuous and fiery people require a 
stronger curb than a cooler and more reflective race. What may 
be safely left to the better judgment of educated and enlightened 
citizens, can not be submitted to the ignorant, prejudiced caprice 
of semi-civilized barbarians. St. Thomas says that the best gov¬ 
ernment is not one of the so-called simple forms, that is, the 
purely monarchical, the purely aristocratic, or the purely demo¬ 
cratic, but one resulting from a mixture of these forms, in which 
the laws would be made by the elders together with the people. 
Thus it is clear that he does not look on absolute monarchy as 
the best of governments. All our most able writers have rec¬ 
ommended a mild and temperate government. Since 1789, it is 
true, that the lawless excesses of the revolution have made some 
good Catholics look on royalty as the palladium of order and 
religion ; but they have learned, to their cost, how grievously they 
were mistaken. In every form of government we can find short¬ 
comings to censure, faults to point out, for no human institution 
is free from defect. Yet, the best form is undoubtedly that which, 
while providing for wise legislation, and the efficient execution of 
the laws, leaves the widest field to individual liberty. For these 
reasons I consider the form of government provided for by the 
Constitution of the United States to be one of those most in har¬ 
mony with Catholic principles, one of the best the world has ever 
seen. It has, undoubtedly, its weak points; it relies not princi¬ 
pally on force, but on the patriotic virtue of its citizens; and 
were this virtue to fail, it would totter. But it guarantees the 
fullest liberty to all. While ever allowing a full expression of the 


CIVIL GOVERNMENT. 


19 


popular will, it has adopted a system of checks, which provide 
against the evils of unbridled democracy. The government is not 
left entirely in the hands of the people; the Senate, the Judici- 
ary, are not selected immediately by them. Thus order and states¬ 
manship can have full scope, while the liberty and the rights of 
the individual are respected. 

Under any circumstances, it would be proper, in concluding a 
lecture of this kind, to inculcate the great lesson of Catholic 
morality, fidelity to the laws, and to the Constitution under which 
we live. But if, while we enjoyed peace, these words might have 
appeared but a repetition of patriotic sentiments suited for the 
conclusion of a discourse, at this moment they have a far more 
important significance. The Constitution and the Union have 
been attacked, and with them have been attacked liberty, peace, 
and prosperity. History records insane actions of popular 
phrensy; the foolish jealousy of the Athenians, which made them 
banish their most eminent citizens, lest they should destroy 
the democratic form of government; the insane fury of the Ro¬ 
man Plebs, that kept the Republic in perpetual strife; the mad¬ 
ness of the English Commonwealth and the French Democracy, 
that led to the re-establishment of the governments that had been 
stricken down; but a more causeless uprising, a more insane 
attempt than which we now are battling against, disgraces not 
the annals of popular governments. It is useless to speculate 
on the causes which have led to this revolt. This is no time 
nicely to decide the many questions that may arise, whether the 
blame is to be laid at the door of this one or that one, whether 
had this or that policy been adopted, peace would have been pre¬ 
served. We have now to meet the fact, that peace has not been 
preserved, that it has been broken by the aggression of an unjus¬ 
tifiable, an unnatural rebellion. To this rebellion every good 
citizen must be opposed. According to the principles which I 
have developed this evening, as long as the government of the 
United States exists, to it you owe your allegiance. Nay, more, 
whatever you believe to be necessary to sustain it, that, if it 
comport with your condition in life, and with your other duties, 
you are obliged in conscience to contribute to do. Once great 
and good men pledged before the whole world their lives, their 


20 


CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES OF CIVIL GOVERNMENT. 


fortunes, and their sacred honor in defense of the Declaration 
that made this a free nation, and nobly did they redeem their 
pledge. May the God of peace and order grant that, in the 
present terrible crisis, the same spirit may animate those who 
enjoy the precious boon bequeathed by the Fathers of the Re¬ 
public, that the conclusive victory of the legitimate government 
may swiftly put an end to the present strife, and that once more 
united under our wise Constitution, we may long continue to be a 
free and happy people. 



MTHJUJ PBJJDIPlj 




mutt 



A LECTURE. 


REV. JAMES KEOGH, D. D., 

OF PITTSBURG. PA 



CINCINNATI: 

<. ATHOLIC TELEGRAPH PRINT, 
18 6 2 . 






N 275 83 I 































































s • * r Cv 


r V * * ' 1 * AT 


°* *.„.’ . 0 -' 
r . O <Q V „ < * °x 

*<6 A^ ^ A^ * 

aa ’jEWi*. *«\* : 

• ,vA ° 

4? ❖N ° 


O. * o N o J 




%<? : 


Mlill 


O • A " 






' < o, 

v k * *r 

/ <iS cv > 

^ "’* ^ .. V 

» y * O* *> V 

^ A * V 

° vv ° ' a * mm 


** 0 « 




A ; 


o 


* » 


^ a • 

vP v * 


A 




<<A 


\ V 


s * t 

<i> *4 


• a>** 

-« A V *>* 

4 *4 ^ 




V * K \ ' ^ X 

<A c ° * C * ^ 

aa v 
^ <S& o 

o V 


<»* 


o 

A'V • 

,* A? ^ °. 4 

* A o 'o.i* * 

4 i ,..-.. -V A 

t , O 


X» ^ 


0 N 0 


% <A> 


,0 

& *-y ^ * ^Fniz/y^- -* 

^ 6* * ■ 

; ^ * 

& ** 4 .^ ^ 0 % ■' k ^ j_ ,* 

^ / -» 0 > ^#. O N 0 

X -s. ^ \ c • * 


crt 


4° V 


6 A^'a 

V <4* ^ 


V V s 

o ^ A / 

*U* 






0 


O * A 


* A, X 

A> \.v «> * * 

A* *+ 

; n <, AissM^v^ ^ 


r <v^» 

r * xV ^ 

4 ^ ^ 


” +to« 


'• 


^ / 1 


1 A °x : 

>' ** 


G 1 ' '^, '•'. »* A 

c° yJJrk, * °- / ^ 0 “° 

\y A^r 

* o V 

o <0 VV 

» *><}'«■ 


0 


o o 




O M 0 




<^p <4 * 


9 ^*°- 


> 


■ A V -X. - 

r * A » A\ » 

4 9- 


"»• *- A 

A V r .0 « <5 




o 

*? °>/ ° * 

* ry*> • ^ -4 

1 A A '• •»* / 

o^ • 1 '*. ^o A v 

0 °.„ a , 


4-° •’“<*• 


o v‘ 


4° V 


O N 0 




,f 


» 

4 O. 

-OA X'* v> 

V, *' 1 Ar °^ * ° *° 

*A 4 > - s * • ^C> 

°o ^ ^ 

°. V^ ; 

° <1^ ^ o * A^-A 

a g ^ '«• * * A <* v '.. * 

Or ^ ^ ^.0 


4 V 


\ 0 v*. 

* ^ * 


xN V 

.» 


^ Tk 

^ A 


O' 


^ A 



x 9 V ^ ^ 0 « 0 V A°° * 4 » * »' 1 ‘ ’ 

V . vLM'v c\ x9 V A ‘ <> V s **v^ < 

<« ^ A *iy -v y. i 


a A% 

<v/ r O '®.'A A ^ . 

0 ^ * U ' 6 9 O A ^ c 0 N ° + . 

c ^Va^ " ° ^ ^ G w 1 





o . ^ or 



























A° % A 

^ V O' «** 


> . W .‘ J . 
% '••** ,<v o 

K o A c o«o ^ <$> 

▼ O J v” * . <* 


TA* <G* A>. 


<* "o, /j> ►. 

* ^ 


CT t .^v. ^c 


S* * A^A* 

4 *V ^ 

'«• *• A <, " 

A 0 o N e ♦ <$> 

> < 1 ** •c^vt^ + 

><Lfc A <. T, 

’br ?% 2 W£!k ^ 



4 \ V s * 
. V ^ £ 

' ° ^ ♦ 1 — 

O ^Sgjplll 

i** a v ^ i wsw* ^ 

tt.*' o T A A^y. * A \°’'o. 

-° % A % / ,v^:- % 



>, oWJ&XP* aV *5- » ®1S * &* ^ o*K 

<i* • €; c>> ■* v v* <iV v Ii» , 1 

v^> '*>.** A *•'7.** (y \p A <V 

► c> Ar c 0 M ® ♦ rv « »• f ® - *^r> *G V r o w c ^ 

^*: "bv* *o« i£Mg^ , *b k • « • ’’V 

•>° V^V v®v V^V 

^ .VvV/)> *♦ V A V ,^A. a- A 



o 'o.A* A <* ,G V O 'o.** A 

^O <G c 0 N ° ♦ '^Av 0^ • t ' * -* O <& o ° M ° ^Vv 

■» o ^ ^c, (y y no ir??-^ + o • VssNr v ^ 

V- -o/ ^ -v^'. 



i° ^ V 

o ^ -^f.* ^ 

.o V. •>’ <V 
r ^ y # ^ *> 



H < 


<• A^''*^ -» 

* V ^ * 




_ N. MANCHESTER, 
INDIANA 46962 


* oH 

„ o, *» A 'A s % G^ &, *o . 

^ -Sr 0 ° " ° + 0 V . t » «„ ^5 

vj>__^ ^ '^v 





